Today, Representative John Curtis (R-UT), member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, gave the following remarks during the ‘Asia, Pacific, and Nonproliferation’ subcommittee hearing in preparation for the President’s arrival in Vietnam for a summit with North Korean leader, Kim Jung Un. The two leaders are expected to discuss progress towards ridding the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons.

Via YouTube

“I am hopeful that we see a productive summit between our President and Kim Jong Un. However, history has proven that the Kim regime does not negotiate in good faith, so the burden will be on Kim Jong Un to prove otherwise. Regardless of what comes out of this Summit, I will continue urging this administration to apply maximum pressure on Kim’s regime—both economically and diplomatically—so that we may achieve a peaceful end to North Korea’s nuclear program.” The Congressman’s full remarks, as prepared for delivery, are below: “I am hopeful that we see a productive summit between our President and Kim Jong Un. However, history has proven that the Kim regime does not negotiate in good faith, so the burden will be on Kim Jong Un to prove otherwise. Regardless of what comes out of this Summit, I will continue urging this administration to apply maximum pressure on Kim’s regime—both economically and diplomatically—so that we may achieve a peaceful end to North Korea’s nuclear program. That being said, we need to gauge what reasonable expectations of this summit are.

1. Dr. Cha: In your testimony, you state explicitly: “North Korea will not wholly give up its nuclear weapons program.” So, in your opinion, what would a successful result of the Hanoi summit look like? What reasonable expectations should we have or hope for?
2. The facts consistently indicate that North Korea will never fully denuclearize. But the Administration continues to hold to the official stance that the goal of these summits is the denuclearization of North Korea. Looking into the future, what can this overall process of summit diplomacy realistically produce for the United States? Is the US policymaking community being honest with itself about the actual objectives of these talks?”